/lit/ - Literature

>>2885623
>>2885623
HEIDEGGER

BAM.

>>2850586
>>That shit's so cis male. Really, "honor", "masculine domination in a relationship", "monogamy and faithfulness only applies for females", a constant struggle to reach masculinity. Social expectation all over the place.
If this is so "cis-male" why does it only happen to black cis males and not white cis males? The cis factor fails to explain for this difference.

>>2850551
From Pinker's book.

>>"In an influential article called "Crime as Social Control,", the legal scholar Donald Black argued that most of what we called crime is, from the point of view of the perpetator, the pursuit of justice. Black begins with a statistic that has long been known to criminologists: only a minority of homicides (perhaps fewer than 10 percent) are committed as a means to a practical end, such as killing a homeowner during a burglary, a policeman during an arrest, or the victim of a robbery or rape because dead people tell no tales." The most common motives for homicide are moralistic: retaliation for an insult, escalation of a domestic quarrel, punishing an unfaithful or deserting romantic partner, and other acts of jealousy, revenge, and self-defense.

The whole thing is available in a Kindle file on demonoid.

White people are responsible.

Because white people feel guilt for slavery they lessen the punishment of African Americans and punish them disproportionately less than they punish whites for the same crime. Because of this African Americans must take the law into their own hands since the white justice system refuses to prosecute black on black crime to the same degree that it prosecutes white on white crime. In Steven Pinker's book on violence, he noted that 90% of violent crimes are retaliatory i.e. it was people taken vengeance into their own hands. This creates a cycle in which more black people become essentially stateless as they cannot go to the police because they already have a crime record from taking the law into their own hands. The incentive structure which keeps whites in lines don't exist for many ghetto blacks because laws make it easier for those with a criminal record to obtain jobs; the underground/black market economy also allow them to live "outside" the law. The cult of rehabilitation has made African Americans disillusioned with the justice system, so they are forced to take justice into their own hands. The problem with African Americans is not that they are punished too harshly but that they are not punished harshly enough.

"Crime as Social Control" http://www.csun.edu/~egodard/readings/Black-1983-CrimeasSC.pdf Read the chapter in Pinker's book where he references this article and he gives more context on how many blacks are essentially stateless and are vigilantes since (1) lots of black cops are corrupt and (2) many white cops are ultra-lenient and indifferent to non-super-serious crimes because they don't want to get into trouble.

>>2839800
>>But that is not true. The difficulty that a text by Foucault or Deleuze contains is to a large degree not the result of a difficult problem or a difficult solution but the result of authorial vanity and a tactical hedge against criticism.
The notion that philosophies or writing have to be perfectly intelligible or translatable into terminology apart from its own and thus "refutable" presumes a worldview in which philosophy or thinking must be argumentative and that the argumentative mode of thought is the sole domain of genuine thinking. This interpretation is already decisive in that it excludes certain philosophies which declares that the available vocabulary and stock of metaphysical concepts has exhausted itself. Rorty recognized this. From "Essays on Heidegger"

>>This insusceptibility to argument is what makes "the philosophy of reflection" — the tradition
of transcendental inquiry within which Gasché wishes to embed Derrida — the bite noire of
philosophers who take public discussability as the essence of rationality. Habermas's polemic
against the late Heidegger and against Derrida has the same motives as Carnap's attack on the
early Heidegger. 13 Like Carnap, Habermas thinks that philosophy ought to be argumentative.
He thinks that Heidegger and Derrida are merely oracular. My own view is that we should
avoid slogans like "philosophy ought to be argumentative" (or any other slogan that begins
"philosophy ought to be ... ") and recognize that the writers usually identified as
"philosophers" include both argumentative problem-solvers like Aristotle and Russell and
oracular world-disclosers like Plato and Hegel — both people good at rendering public
accounts and people good at leaping in the dark.

>>2835727
>>I object to this because materialists can find their circle quite comfy and will wonder why you just can't address them on their terms.
Only by being hypocrites and thanking the waiter for bringing them the coffee.

>>2835702
>>Philosophy of language advanced. We know the outside world outside us exists because there is no private language and the self is created through language games. Meaning is everywhere.
Those "advancements" have nothing to do with ethics. Wittgenstein said that ethics was beyond the realm of human language. Heidegger said that ethics was impossible. Nihilism.

>>Not materialist, but empiricist definitely (which I basically what I am.)
>>Unreliability of senses, induction as unreliable, ideas as having some reality of their own. Is that what he's trying to do? All I see are materialists don't believe in selves or outside truths, so they undermine all knowledge of any kind. I simply don't think a materialist needs to follow them over that cliff.
Empiricism and the myth of the given are utterly discredited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Dogmas_of_Empiricism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfrid_Sellars

>>2835637
>>As I said before, opulence vs asceticism. There wouldn't be an issue if Catholics didn't have a Bible that condemned images and said money should be given to the poor.
And Christ is a warmonger who wanted to break apart the nuclear family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/But_to_bring_a_sword
http://bible.cc/luke/14-26.htm


>>. The Crusades were hypocrisy from a religion that supposedly teaches love and non-resistance.
>>non-resistance
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes+3&version=NIV
>> a time to kill and a time to heal,
>>A TIME TO KILL.

>>2834555
>> can be thrown right back at him, see the New Atheists.
The New Atheists' argument for the supposed insanity of belief in God is that belief in God contradicts their own worldview.

Chesterton doesn't say that heathens are literally crazy, as do the New Atheists, but that materialism is logically similar, parallel in argumentative coherence, to the madman's insanity. Moreover Chesterton grants that the heathen worldview IS RATIONAL.

>>The madman's explanation of a thing is always complete, and often in a purely rational sense satisfactory. Or, to speak more strictly, the insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable; this may be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds of madness. If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy against him, you cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men deny that they are conspirators; which is exactly what conspirators would do. His explanation covers the facts as much as yours. Or if a man says that he is the rightful King of England, it is no complete answer to say that the existing authorities call him mad; for if he were King of England that might be the wisest thing for the existing authorities to do. Or if a man says that he is Jesus Christ, it is no answer to tell him that the world denies his divinity; for the world denied Christ's.

>>2834544
>>He claims that anti-christians contradict themselves in their complaints, but many of those are due to the contradictions in Christianity itself.
Such as?

>>2834544
>>The main thing I think is the problem is that there is a lot of "I believe it is true because it allows me to be happy". I
Nonsense. It's not "More happy" but "more sensible".
>> based simply on what notions seem good or beautiful, you need evidence from the outside.
Like what? The whole notion of "evidence from the outside" is already decisively materialist.
>>2834555
>>social Darwinism
Evolution =/= Social Darwinism. Chesterton was arguing against the former.

>>Same with the nihilists and determinists he argues against.
How are those two any less credible today than they were a hundred years ago?

>> And the charges of mental illness can be thrown right back at him
How?
>>see the New Atheists.
The New Atheists argue that anyone who isn't mad is mad, exactly what madmen would say.


>>brushing aside their thought with a few simple paradoxes as if paradoxes themselves were arguments and evidence.
How can you disprove empiricism empirically?

The scientific view of the world is nihilistic.

It's disorientating. Lots of characters, no central motivation. Is it suppose to parody the soviet system ? I'm not getting political parody either, and I know a lot about the Soviet system, how the mid level cadres worked, Gulags, Great Purge, etc.

It's not a psychological novel either since it doesn't focus on a single character. Most of it is to me Wolan being a magician and scaring people. Is he a symbol for the Soviet system that can make up false papers and get you arrested? Because papers are appearing out of thin air signed, people have no memory of the "official" version of the events that transpired.

I'm reading it now.

I don't "get it". Can someone help?

During the period of time when these reforms happened, the rate at which standard of living was rising would have been much faster under a Western regime.

Your accomplishments are not measured against zero but against the expected norm. If you're running a country and you get 0.5% growth in GDP when the norm is 2.0% you are a failure.

So why aren't you addicted to Tristan und Isolde, lit?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AweQBBsdEVc

>>2725375
So what do you listen to?

>>2725378
>>essentially musical pulp
What's not pulp in your eyes?


>>2725381
Liar liar.

Nietzsche loves Wagner.

What is your favorite Wagner prelude, /lit?

Mine is the prelude to Act I of Meistersinger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nhcTllJgIY

Isn't it gorgeous?

>>2720921
Have you ever listened to the Kubelik recording?


>>2720927
1993 Berlin Barenboim Meier, definitive DVD imo.

>>2720845
>>Musical quality =/= musical complexity.
Never said that, merely contradicting your equation of him with pop music.

He was never popular.
>>2720963
True.

>>2720826
>>I think he's a pompous teutonic prick, his music being the 19th century equivalent of shitty pop.

Are you fucking me. He composed some of the most complex music of all time.

>>2720817
Anything else?

>>2720818
Typical pleb.

>>2720647
Opera is more music than literature.
>>2720677
Do you just listen to the preludes or the actual operas in their entirety?
>>2720681
Pleb.


>>2720761
I just want to see if there are any Wagnerites on /lit/.


>>2720765
He fled from his debtors and stole the wives of his friends.
Bohemian as fuck.
>>2720767
>>but god damn is he exhausting
True, his music is time consuming. There's so much in the music, it's overwhelming.

Seriously no one here is a fan of Wagner?

And I thought /mu/ was pleb.